It's rare for the SNP to rate a New Labour policy. But they are right to do so in the case of the London Challenge. Nicola Sturgeon has just announced that her government will spend £100 million applying its lessons to Scotland's schools.

At the end of the last century, London's secondaries were the worst in England, a by-word for bad behaviour, truancy and educational failure. The London Challenge was set up in 2003 to sort out the mess.

The starting point was a focus on data and creating a culture of accountability - no hiding, no excuses - for what that data showed. The improvement targets set were demanding. Expectations were high but so was the support given to staff and students. Successes were enthusiastically celebrated.

There was a heavy emphasis on leadership training. Head teachers were given more freedom and their judgements trusted. They were encouraged to use their initiative. Innovative, risk-taking approaches were supported. Professional development programmes and peer-to-peer reviews helped improved teaching standards.

Most spending went on the poorest performing schools. Better schools were given money to release staff to help the strugglers. Collaboration between schools to solve common problems was at the heart of the initiative.

The results were remarkable. Within three years, the performance of London's 400 secondary schools was above the national average and has continued to improve. By 2010, London had a higher proportion of good and outstanding schools than any other area. 30% of its schools are now rated as 'outstanding' by Ofsted compared to 17.5% nationally.

Even after the Tories cut the Challenge funding in 2011, a poor pupil is still more likely to perform better in the capital than the rest of England. Those receiving free school meals in London do 50% better at GCSEs than their peers elsewhere.

Some questioned the Challenge's impact. They put the improvements down to the embourgeoisement of inner London or the influx of aspirational immigrant families. But mere demographics can't explain such dramatic improvements in so short a time. Good schools can't cure all of society's ills but they can make a huge difference quickly.

There's plenty to do in Scotland. In international league tables, we (narrowly) outperform England but are well behind the likes of Finland, Holland, Belgium, Switzerland and Estonia. We've just been overtaken by Poland. Its recent educational reforms show the rapid impact change can make.

As Nicola Sturgeon herself points out, in every local authority in Scotland, there are young people who are not achieving all they are capable of. In the 10 per cent most deprived areas, fewer than one pupil in three leaves school with at least one Higher. In the most affluent areas, it's four out of every five. That, says Sturgeon, is just not acceptable.

Some aspects of the London Challenge would be controversial in Scotland. It was linked to a fast-track training programme, 'Teach First'. We shouldn't dismiss it. From my own 35 years in education, anything in teacher training that shifts the balance from college to classroom is to be welcomed.

It would be wrong too to dismiss the empowering of head teachers as 'free market' or 'privatisation'. Collaboration was paramount in the London Challenge but the key work was done by staff who knew best the children and the communities they served. Head teachers and their senior colleagues will always achieve more than local authority bureaucrats and politicians.

That doesn't eliminate accountability. If school leaders can't turn around a failing school, they should be removed. Ditto a poorly performing teacher who doesn't improve after support. A child's school career is very short. There's no time to waste.

There's plenty of sectional interests who will seek to dilute the Scottish Attainment Challenge. The London Challenge had heavy-weight leaders in Tim Brighouse and Jon Coles. An education minister, Stephen Twigg, had responsibility for its success. The Scottish government would be well-advised to create a similar set-up.

I hope schools in my home city of Glasgow will especially benefit. The city is routinely bottom of the country's performance tables. Only 20% of its pupils achieve 3 or more Highers compared to a 28% Scottish average. Deprivation is the main explanation. But that's no reason to shrug our shoulders.

There are many talented school leaders and teachers doing a great job in the deprived communities of Glasgow and elsewhere in Scotland. But to make a difference, they need more autonomy to act as well as more resources.

The model of the London Challenge points the way forward. At the very least, Scottish children deserve the same chances as their peers in Inner London.